2016 (10) TMI 146 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Refund claim of excess tax paid - TNGST Act, 1959 - Held that - in the absence of any record to show that the Appeal has been preferred by the Revenue as against the order passed in Tax Case Revisions, the Court is inclined to accept the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no Appeal preferred. The Assessing Officer given a letter, dated 26.04.2016, discharging two bank guarantees, which were furnished by the petitioner, for a sum of ₹ 70,08,501/- and ₹ 1,44,59 676/-. The said letters have been addressed to the Branch Manager, Royal Bank of Scotland, New Delhi Branch, New Delhi, and the letter is termed as Discharge Letter. In the said letter, the Assessing Officer confirmed to the Bank that they do not have any claims in respect of the aforesaid two bank guarantees, and requested that the said communication may be treated as Discharge Letter, for the purpose of the records of the Bank. Thus, if the Revenue thought fit to re-agitate the matter, obviously, the Assessing Officer would not have given such letters, discharging the bank guarantees. Direction given to the respondent to consider the petitioner s representations, dated 03.11.2015, 06.11.2015, 27.01.2016, 29.02.2016 and 05.04.2016, and effect refund of the admissible amount in accordance with law within a period of six weeks - petition dismissed - decided in favor of petitioner.

Summary

Issues:
1. Direction to refund excess tax paid by the petitioner for two assessment years.
2. Appeal status against the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench.
3. Assessment orders, appeals, and Tribunal decisions regarding tax liability and penalty.
4. Order of the Hon'ble Division Bench on classification of goods and tax applicability.
5. Discharge of bank guarantees by the Assessing Officer.
6. Disposal of the Writ Petition for consideration of petitioner's representations and refund.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner sought a direction for a refund of excess tax paid amounting to &8377; 80,68,760/- and &8377; 1,43,92,685/- for the assessment years 2004-05 and 2005-06 under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959.

2. The court noted the submissions regarding the appeal status against the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench. The petitioner provided a letter confirming the filing of a Caveat Petition in the Supreme Court but no proof of filing a Special Leave Petition by the respondents was produced. The court observed the absence of any record showing the filing of an appeal by the Revenue.

3. The assessment orders were challenged by the petitioner before the Appellate Authority and the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal partially allowed the petitioner's appeals and struck down the Department's classification of certain products. The petitioner further challenged the order on the classification of multi-function network printers before the Hon'ble Division Bench, which was allowed in favor of the assessee.

4. The Hon'ble Division Bench's order clarified the classification of goods as peripherals of a computer, leading to the allowance of the revisions in favor of the assessee against the Revenue. The court highlighted the nature of the equipment and its predominant use in determining the classification under the TNGST.

5. The Assessing Officer's actions were crucial in the case, as evidenced by the discharge of two bank guarantees by a letter dated 26.04.2016. The letter confirmed the absence of any claims against the bank guarantees, indicating a lack of intent to re-agitate the matter by the Revenue.

6. Consequently, the Writ Petition was disposed of, directing the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representations and effect a refund of the admissible amount within six weeks from the date of the order. No costs were imposed in the judgment. The court's decision was based on the lack of appeal by the Revenue, the actions of the Assessing Officer, and the petitioner's entitlement to a refund based on the Tribunal's decision and subsequent orders.